Sony RX1 - 1-й в мире FF компакт
Всего 7368 сообщ.
|
Показаны 1781 - 1800
Re[Владимир79]:
И давно пишут. 2 месяца назад.
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
R1R приоритет дырки, исо 100, F11, 5 секунд
EOS650 24-105 приоритет дырки, исо 200, дырка 22, 25 секунд
Снимкм сделанные в разные дни, от сапога пару недель назад, р1р только что... не показательно, но от р1р снимок без обработки, от сапога подтянул уровни, обратил внимание на ББ...
EOS650 24-105 приоритет дырки, исо 200, дырка 22, 25 секунд
Снимкм сделанные в разные дни, от сапога пару недель назад, р1р только что... не показательно, но от р1р снимок без обработки, от сапога подтянул уровни, обратил внимание на ББ...
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
исо 4000, дырка 2, тусклая комнатная лампа, 1/200
если не рассматривать кроп, вполне смотрибельно, на D800E на этих параметрах с фиксом 50/1,4 говно какое то у меня выходило... (не исключаю мою рукожопость)
если не рассматривать кроп, вполне смотрибельно, на D800E на этих параметрах с фиксом 50/1,4 говно какое то у меня выходило... (не исключаю мою рукожопость)
котЭ
RX1R
f/2 + RPP K64 + кадрирование
f/2 + RPP K64 + кадрирование
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
Пишут два месяца назад, а фотки с RX1R выложили здесь только сейчас...
Re[AleksLush]:
от:AleksLush
R1R приоритет дырки, исо 100, F11, 5 секунд
Снимкм сделанные в разные дни, от сапога пару недель назад, р1р только что... не показательно, но от р1р снимок без обработки, от сапога подтянул уровни, обратил внимание на ББ...Подробнее
Сапог-то поинтересней смотрится ощутимо...не совсем честное сравнение вышло
Re[Одиссей]:
По-моему, оба фото не заслуживают обсуждения. Не знаю, зачем люди хотят такое показывать... 
Re[Одиссей]:
Ну я и написал, что сравнение не показательное, но Бб на сони правильнее, на обоих аппаратах Бб автомат, но на сапоге без легкой правки фото совсем не интересное!
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
Может и не заслуживают, но тема мертвая, не смотря на то, что аппарат весьма достоен обсудить его и может сравнить с чем либо!
Re[AleksLush]:
Да я не против, но выкладывайте, пожалуйста, что-нибудь поинтереснее. Вот котик - более-менее, а если к нему еще немного обработки приложить, то совсем был бы хорош... ;)
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
Заключение из обзора на http://diglloyd.com . ;)
"This is a comparative essay capturing what I feel is a seminal moment in the evolution of “new” and “old” digital camera design. Not all considerations can be stated here (far too many) so I will instead will focus on some key “decider” points I noted during extensive field usage.
My perspective on the Sony RX1 / RX1R is that of a DSLR user in some ways, but based on my field usage I see it as most appropriate to compare it to a Leica M Typ 240: the Sony RX1 / RX1R paradigm is a direct threat to the best features of the Leica M system. That is to say it is not a threat but already far superior in most every operational way (efficiency and hit rate), at least for those making images (as opposed to the most or many Leica buyers who buy one to make a fashion statement). As I own an extensive Leica M system, this is an owner’s perspective for real world shooting, with price left out of consideration except as an afterthought: which is a “better” camera**? Which delivers the best results, which starts with minimizing various errors, especially focusing and exposure?
The one and only thing that really holds the Sony RX1R back is both a strength and a weakness: one focal length only. Similar ideas apply to DSLRs in some applications, but DSLRs are also far more versatile than a Leica M system.
* “RX1R” should be taken to mean that I prefer the RX1R (by virtue of having no anti-aliasing filter and its possibly tuned design), but the RX1 ought to exhibit the same or nearly the same characteristics as the RX1R.
** By definition, “better” demands some objective context. My usage is all around shooting: people, outdoors, general usage for both contemplative and fast-changing situations.
What is the target market?
As of 2013 the digital camera industry is at an inflection point of quality and usability: quality has risen to a very high level at very reasonable prices (in proper context), but various camera platforms lag badly in usability, mainly by virtue of inertial design or checkbox non-design.
But the Sony RX1R solve the quality issue handily and very nearly solves the usability issue, falling only a little short of ideal. A killer combination. The RX1R represents the first concrete example of a new genre combining exceptional image quality and high usability and pure and simple: shooting enjoyment. Thus the discussion here is in part about the entire genre represented at its best as of September 2013 by the Sony RX1R.
The closest and most relevant comparison from my personal field shooting perspective is the Leica M Typ 240 (with EVF) along with the Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH, a popular combination*. Obviously a Leica M can take a wide variety of lenses an that might be a deciding factor for some shooters.
* The Leica 35/2 Summicron-M ASPH could be considered, but it is not quite at the same level of the Summilux and so I hold the Sony RX1R to the higher standard of the 35/1.4 Summilux.
My field work conclusions
These thoughts are primarily based on extensive field shooting of the Sony RX1R in August 2013 using the Sony Electronic viewfinder FDA-EVM1K and the Really Right Stuff L bracket and grip.
Without the EVF and the grip, usability drops considerably, so I consider them essential. My usability comments implicitly assume the EVF and grip.
Reliability
After several thousand frames I had zero camera glitches. Compare that to the Leica M Typ 240 which hamstrung me on multiple days at critical times, including total lockup and system reset problems. Reliable operation is the first and most critical quality of any camera. The RX1R passed with flying colors, which of course must be understood for what is is not: I cannot here address what happens in 1/2/3 years of usage.
Programmability
The Sony RX1R buttons and dials can be programmed to perform desired functions. This let me set the camera up just the way I wanted it, essential to efficient operation for one’s own working style. This capability is absent in the Leica M Typ 240 (no ability to customize); there is not even a “My Menu” setting. I have now pressed the controls about 1000 times getting to the Level feature alone for the Leica M240—it’s absurd by comparison.
Lens
The Zeiss 35mm f/2 Sonnar can be fairly said to be at a level similar to the famed Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH, better in some ways (low field curvature, superior color consistency across the frame, more consistent overall bokeh), and a little worse in others (slightly more distortion, possibly slightly lower peak contrast).
But a lens does not exist on its own; it is the combination of lens + sensor + electronic that makes the image. The Zeiss 35/2 Sonnar on the RX1R is designed for and matched to the sensor. Here one has to say that the Sony RX1R is at least the equal and arguably superior in terms of total image quality to the Leica M Typ 240 with 35/1.4 Summilux. Different in some subjective ways, but on the whole my field experience tells me that the Leica holds no advantage in image quality, and the shooting experience with the RX1R is vastly superior (ease, enjoyment and hit rate).
The Zeiss 35mm f/2 Sonnar performance is excellent at ƒ/2 and by ƒ/2.8 is impressive and one need stop down from there only for depth of field: shooting at ƒ/5.6 - ƒ/8 provides some insurance against possible focusing errors with complex 3D subjects.
Overall image quality
My impression based on many field shots is that compared to the Leica M240, the Sony RX1R sensor has slightly better dynamic range, slightly lower noise (even more so at higher ISO), slightly better color, and more consistent color across the frame as a whole. In short, my impression is that the two are close, but that the RX1R has a small but visible edge.
The RX1R also seems to be nearly the equal of the Nikon D800, but perhaps with just a little less dynamic range. In short it represents state of the art in an ultra compact form factor with a superb lens.
Autofocus
I relied almost exclusively on autofocus (highly unusual for me) when field shooting the Sony RX1R and came away mightily impressed; only the Ricoh GR has impressed me as much in terms of nailing my intended focus. Sony seems to have fixed the autofocus issues I initially observed with the original RX1 in August 2012; perhaps the lack of an anti-aliasing filter also helps detect contrast a bit better. But as of this writing I had made no explicitly difficult test of the RX1R.
Moreover, the RX1R dealt with difficult 3D subjects by generally avoiding the common autofocus error of focusing on the background when the subject is in the foreground (e.g. “open” subject matter such as clusters of flowers or tree branches). I did not explicitly test for autofocus errors, but I was on the lookout in all my images and came away very impressed by not finding problems.
My main gripe with the RX1R is that it always focuses with the lens stopped down to the shooting aperture; it ought to focus wide open or at ƒ/2.8 in order to place the zone of sharp focus optimally at the desired point of focus. However, I did not detect any obvious zone of sharpness bias problems, so apparently Sony engineers have done their homework. (For aperture series I focus once at ƒ/2, then set focus to manual so that it does not change).
Hit rate
Bad focus or bad exposure are image killers. Thus a camera that delivers fast and accurate autofocus with reliable auto exposure is a huge win over a camera that is manual focus only and/or one with metering issues.
In terms of hit rate, the Sony RX1R with autofocus and EVF is simply in another league as compared to a Leica M240 in focus accuracy (fast and highly reliable). It’s hard to underestimate the value of this: in fast-changing late day or stormy conditions, lighting can change second-to-second in places I enjoy shooting; autofocus makes capturing the moment an instantaneous exercise and that autofocus sensor can be moved around at will. Contrast that to M240 manual focus with tired or irritated or sunglassed-eyes in varied lighting with nothing good to focus on and awkward zoom in/out and center-only focus and it is NO CONTEST for efficiency and hit rate.
With the RX1R I used auto exposure which I tweaked with exposure compensation for a better exposure (e.g., ETTR). Even better, everything can be done in 1/3 stops on the lens or with the shutter speed. The tactile and auditory experience of making such adjustments is efficient and rewarding: the camera gets out of the way and everything is visible in the EVF, so the eye can remain in place. With the M240 I am forced into manual exposure all too often because of blow-out issues. Exposure compensation is possible with the M240 (less conveniently), but in the field the M240 is regularly is off by as much as 1.5 stops; that means switching to manual exposure. I did not have to engage in this time-wasting effort with the Sony RX1R.
The net result was a very high percentage of perfectly focused images, and very few blown-out exposures. The RX1R delivered the goods with professional reliability. This is the highest praise I can give it. As a matter of fact, I shot 10X as many frames with the RX1R with zero glitches; with the Leica M240 I had reliability issues (camera lockups and rangefinder problems). The M240 began to feel like a tedious hassle.
EVF quality
The Sony EVF is a joy to use. The Leica M240 EVF produces an image that to the eye looks like a cheap child’s toy by comparison.
The Sony EVF offers a visually rewarding experience that compels the photographer to keep shooting; the M240 EVF offers a dismal viewing experience that made me want to put the camera back in my pack.
Switching between the two cameras, I literally began to resent having to use the low grade Leica EVF. With some luck and a lot of patience, perhaps by 2014 perhaps Leica will support the Olympus VF-4 EVF which offers a image quality similar to the Sony EVF (the Olympus VF-2 works on the M240 and both ought to be compatible).
Leveling feature
The RX1R has the most usable electronic level that I have yet used in a digital camera. I made more level images more easily than I’ve ever made in my life because the RX1R level is superimposed on the image in the EVF; I can peripherally watch the edges go green then press the release at that moment. It is far superior in operation to Nikon or Canon DSLRs, or the modal Leica M240 level feature. I could make RX1R panoramic images this way with the entire series level or very nearly so, with ease. A terrific improvement over other cameras.
By comparison, Leica buries the Level feature 12 button presses deep within the menus with no option to access it in any other way and it is not available in the EVF at all! Worse, it is modal, meaning it cannot be superimposed on the image so it is entirely useless except on a tripod (not possible to frame an image and make it level at the same time!). It is a non-design that ought be an embarrassment to Leica as an amateurish science fair effort, not a usable camera feature.
Conclusions
Limited and specific as per the intent of this essay.
For general shooting
The RX1R brought me tremendous shooting enjoyment with a high hit rate and superb image quality. The EVF and grip are essential, but with those items the camera was one of the most enjoyable to shoot that I have ever used, the EVF feeling quite addictive in inciting me to keep shooting. Carrying it all day was hardly noticed.
Together with a smaller pocketable APS-C camera like the Ricoh GR and/or Sigma DP Merrill, one can cover a lot of focal length range.
For the prospective or existing Leica M shooter
If the goal is primarily a 35mm lens on full frame with very high quality, the Sony RX1R is smaller and weighs less, offers equal and possibly better image quality, costs 1/3 as much, has a far higher hit rate for focusing (excellent autofocus), superior exposure accuracy, apparently higher dynamic range, a far superior EVF both in terms of resolution, color, contrast and brightness behavior, programmable controls offering direct access, and longer battery life.
As for reliability, four Sony RX1R cameras can be had for the price of one M240 + 35/1.4 Summilux (quadruple redundancy). That is one way to handle it (buy two). Surely that idea is not small potatoes for remote usage where no camera repair is possible. And the simple fact is that in the field my M240 was unreliable with several problems (gone for repair for nearly a month means zero pictures with it!) whereas the RX1R had zero problems.
Value
The value proposition is simple: a premium price for a full-frame sensor in an ultra-compact package with a superb lens: if “state of the art full-frame quality in compact form” is the goal, the Sony RX1R delivers better than any camera on the market (Sept 2013). "
"This is a comparative essay capturing what I feel is a seminal moment in the evolution of “new” and “old” digital camera design. Not all considerations can be stated here (far too many) so I will instead will focus on some key “decider” points I noted during extensive field usage.
My perspective on the Sony RX1 / RX1R is that of a DSLR user in some ways, but based on my field usage I see it as most appropriate to compare it to a Leica M Typ 240: the Sony RX1 / RX1R paradigm is a direct threat to the best features of the Leica M system. That is to say it is not a threat but already far superior in most every operational way (efficiency and hit rate), at least for those making images (as opposed to the most or many Leica buyers who buy one to make a fashion statement). As I own an extensive Leica M system, this is an owner’s perspective for real world shooting, with price left out of consideration except as an afterthought: which is a “better” camera**? Which delivers the best results, which starts with minimizing various errors, especially focusing and exposure?
The one and only thing that really holds the Sony RX1R back is both a strength and a weakness: one focal length only. Similar ideas apply to DSLRs in some applications, but DSLRs are also far more versatile than a Leica M system.
* “RX1R” should be taken to mean that I prefer the RX1R (by virtue of having no anti-aliasing filter and its possibly tuned design), but the RX1 ought to exhibit the same or nearly the same characteristics as the RX1R.
** By definition, “better” demands some objective context. My usage is all around shooting: people, outdoors, general usage for both contemplative and fast-changing situations.
What is the target market?
As of 2013 the digital camera industry is at an inflection point of quality and usability: quality has risen to a very high level at very reasonable prices (in proper context), but various camera platforms lag badly in usability, mainly by virtue of inertial design or checkbox non-design.
But the Sony RX1R solve the quality issue handily and very nearly solves the usability issue, falling only a little short of ideal. A killer combination. The RX1R represents the first concrete example of a new genre combining exceptional image quality and high usability and pure and simple: shooting enjoyment. Thus the discussion here is in part about the entire genre represented at its best as of September 2013 by the Sony RX1R.
The closest and most relevant comparison from my personal field shooting perspective is the Leica M Typ 240 (with EVF) along with the Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH, a popular combination*. Obviously a Leica M can take a wide variety of lenses an that might be a deciding factor for some shooters.
* The Leica 35/2 Summicron-M ASPH could be considered, but it is not quite at the same level of the Summilux and so I hold the Sony RX1R to the higher standard of the 35/1.4 Summilux.
My field work conclusions
These thoughts are primarily based on extensive field shooting of the Sony RX1R in August 2013 using the Sony Electronic viewfinder FDA-EVM1K and the Really Right Stuff L bracket and grip.
Without the EVF and the grip, usability drops considerably, so I consider them essential. My usability comments implicitly assume the EVF and grip.
Reliability
After several thousand frames I had zero camera glitches. Compare that to the Leica M Typ 240 which hamstrung me on multiple days at critical times, including total lockup and system reset problems. Reliable operation is the first and most critical quality of any camera. The RX1R passed with flying colors, which of course must be understood for what is is not: I cannot here address what happens in 1/2/3 years of usage.
Programmability
The Sony RX1R buttons and dials can be programmed to perform desired functions. This let me set the camera up just the way I wanted it, essential to efficient operation for one’s own working style. This capability is absent in the Leica M Typ 240 (no ability to customize); there is not even a “My Menu” setting. I have now pressed the controls about 1000 times getting to the Level feature alone for the Leica M240—it’s absurd by comparison.
Lens
The Zeiss 35mm f/2 Sonnar can be fairly said to be at a level similar to the famed Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH, better in some ways (low field curvature, superior color consistency across the frame, more consistent overall bokeh), and a little worse in others (slightly more distortion, possibly slightly lower peak contrast).
But a lens does not exist on its own; it is the combination of lens + sensor + electronic that makes the image. The Zeiss 35/2 Sonnar on the RX1R is designed for and matched to the sensor. Here one has to say that the Sony RX1R is at least the equal and arguably superior in terms of total image quality to the Leica M Typ 240 with 35/1.4 Summilux. Different in some subjective ways, but on the whole my field experience tells me that the Leica holds no advantage in image quality, and the shooting experience with the RX1R is vastly superior (ease, enjoyment and hit rate).
The Zeiss 35mm f/2 Sonnar performance is excellent at ƒ/2 and by ƒ/2.8 is impressive and one need stop down from there only for depth of field: shooting at ƒ/5.6 - ƒ/8 provides some insurance against possible focusing errors with complex 3D subjects.
Overall image quality
My impression based on many field shots is that compared to the Leica M240, the Sony RX1R sensor has slightly better dynamic range, slightly lower noise (even more so at higher ISO), slightly better color, and more consistent color across the frame as a whole. In short, my impression is that the two are close, but that the RX1R has a small but visible edge.
The RX1R also seems to be nearly the equal of the Nikon D800, but perhaps with just a little less dynamic range. In short it represents state of the art in an ultra compact form factor with a superb lens.
Autofocus
I relied almost exclusively on autofocus (highly unusual for me) when field shooting the Sony RX1R and came away mightily impressed; only the Ricoh GR has impressed me as much in terms of nailing my intended focus. Sony seems to have fixed the autofocus issues I initially observed with the original RX1 in August 2012; perhaps the lack of an anti-aliasing filter also helps detect contrast a bit better. But as of this writing I had made no explicitly difficult test of the RX1R.
Moreover, the RX1R dealt with difficult 3D subjects by generally avoiding the common autofocus error of focusing on the background when the subject is in the foreground (e.g. “open” subject matter such as clusters of flowers or tree branches). I did not explicitly test for autofocus errors, but I was on the lookout in all my images and came away very impressed by not finding problems.
My main gripe with the RX1R is that it always focuses with the lens stopped down to the shooting aperture; it ought to focus wide open or at ƒ/2.8 in order to place the zone of sharp focus optimally at the desired point of focus. However, I did not detect any obvious zone of sharpness bias problems, so apparently Sony engineers have done their homework. (For aperture series I focus once at ƒ/2, then set focus to manual so that it does not change).
Hit rate
Bad focus or bad exposure are image killers. Thus a camera that delivers fast and accurate autofocus with reliable auto exposure is a huge win over a camera that is manual focus only and/or one with metering issues.
In terms of hit rate, the Sony RX1R with autofocus and EVF is simply in another league as compared to a Leica M240 in focus accuracy (fast and highly reliable). It’s hard to underestimate the value of this: in fast-changing late day or stormy conditions, lighting can change second-to-second in places I enjoy shooting; autofocus makes capturing the moment an instantaneous exercise and that autofocus sensor can be moved around at will. Contrast that to M240 manual focus with tired or irritated or sunglassed-eyes in varied lighting with nothing good to focus on and awkward zoom in/out and center-only focus and it is NO CONTEST for efficiency and hit rate.
With the RX1R I used auto exposure which I tweaked with exposure compensation for a better exposure (e.g., ETTR). Even better, everything can be done in 1/3 stops on the lens or with the shutter speed. The tactile and auditory experience of making such adjustments is efficient and rewarding: the camera gets out of the way and everything is visible in the EVF, so the eye can remain in place. With the M240 I am forced into manual exposure all too often because of blow-out issues. Exposure compensation is possible with the M240 (less conveniently), but in the field the M240 is regularly is off by as much as 1.5 stops; that means switching to manual exposure. I did not have to engage in this time-wasting effort with the Sony RX1R.
The net result was a very high percentage of perfectly focused images, and very few blown-out exposures. The RX1R delivered the goods with professional reliability. This is the highest praise I can give it. As a matter of fact, I shot 10X as many frames with the RX1R with zero glitches; with the Leica M240 I had reliability issues (camera lockups and rangefinder problems). The M240 began to feel like a tedious hassle.
EVF quality
The Sony EVF is a joy to use. The Leica M240 EVF produces an image that to the eye looks like a cheap child’s toy by comparison.
The Sony EVF offers a visually rewarding experience that compels the photographer to keep shooting; the M240 EVF offers a dismal viewing experience that made me want to put the camera back in my pack.
Switching between the two cameras, I literally began to resent having to use the low grade Leica EVF. With some luck and a lot of patience, perhaps by 2014 perhaps Leica will support the Olympus VF-4 EVF which offers a image quality similar to the Sony EVF (the Olympus VF-2 works on the M240 and both ought to be compatible).
Leveling feature
The RX1R has the most usable electronic level that I have yet used in a digital camera. I made more level images more easily than I’ve ever made in my life because the RX1R level is superimposed on the image in the EVF; I can peripherally watch the edges go green then press the release at that moment. It is far superior in operation to Nikon or Canon DSLRs, or the modal Leica M240 level feature. I could make RX1R panoramic images this way with the entire series level or very nearly so, with ease. A terrific improvement over other cameras.
By comparison, Leica buries the Level feature 12 button presses deep within the menus with no option to access it in any other way and it is not available in the EVF at all! Worse, it is modal, meaning it cannot be superimposed on the image so it is entirely useless except on a tripod (not possible to frame an image and make it level at the same time!). It is a non-design that ought be an embarrassment to Leica as an amateurish science fair effort, not a usable camera feature.
Conclusions
Limited and specific as per the intent of this essay.
For general shooting
The RX1R brought me tremendous shooting enjoyment with a high hit rate and superb image quality. The EVF and grip are essential, but with those items the camera was one of the most enjoyable to shoot that I have ever used, the EVF feeling quite addictive in inciting me to keep shooting. Carrying it all day was hardly noticed.
Together with a smaller pocketable APS-C camera like the Ricoh GR and/or Sigma DP Merrill, one can cover a lot of focal length range.
For the prospective or existing Leica M shooter
If the goal is primarily a 35mm lens on full frame with very high quality, the Sony RX1R is smaller and weighs less, offers equal and possibly better image quality, costs 1/3 as much, has a far higher hit rate for focusing (excellent autofocus), superior exposure accuracy, apparently higher dynamic range, a far superior EVF both in terms of resolution, color, contrast and brightness behavior, programmable controls offering direct access, and longer battery life.
As for reliability, four Sony RX1R cameras can be had for the price of one M240 + 35/1.4 Summilux (quadruple redundancy). That is one way to handle it (buy two). Surely that idea is not small potatoes for remote usage where no camera repair is possible. And the simple fact is that in the field my M240 was unreliable with several problems (gone for repair for nearly a month means zero pictures with it!) whereas the RX1R had zero problems.
Value
The value proposition is simple: a premium price for a full-frame sensor in an ultra-compact package with a superb lens: if “state of the art full-frame quality in compact form” is the goal, the Sony RX1R delivers better than any camera on the market (Sept 2013). "
Re[AleksLush]:
от: AleksLush
Ну я и написал, что сравнение не показательное, но Бб на сони правильнее, на обоих аппаратах Бб автомат, но на сапоге без легкой правки фото совсем не интересное!
С точностью до наоборот... Без правки Сони выглядит ужасно, Игорь прав, что такое выкладывать нельзя...имхо, даже удивительно, как Вам удалось так снять этими камерами: они обе на "автомате" в 95% случаев дают нормальные результаты
Re[Одиссей]:
Дык я не претендовал никогда на лавры профиБ более того не исключаю свою криворукость) я любитель, не более)
Re[AleksLush]:
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
В этой теме купил в феврале RX1. Собрался теперь продать за 75 тыс. руб
https://foto.ru/forums/general/baraholka-prodam/696672
Плюс видоискатель, чехол и тп.
https://foto.ru/forums/general/baraholka-prodam/696672
Плюс видоискатель, чехол и тп.
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
За "котика" спасибо, но мне интересно, какой "обработки" не хватает
Re[kadamian]:
Вы не обратили внимание, что писалось не вам?
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
Re[Игорь Тулаев]:
...
